I thought Operation Chaos ended at the election. We ain’t seen nuthin yet.

And Paulsen’s right (his arm is probably still sore from Bush twisting it). There are so many ways to shore up the auto industry. If Chapter 11 is good enough for UAL. It’s good enough for GM. That coupled with tax cuts for anyone who may want to see the USA in a Chevrolet (et al) is far less costly & much more effective.

(SG – I was going to scream my reply but I’m better now ;-)

In the end, THIS IS ALL ABOUT BAILING OUT UNIONS & STICKING GM WITH ALL THOSE PENSIONS!!! LEST WE FORGET THE BIG 3 PAYING 15 BIL JUST LAST YEAR TO THE UNION TO TAKE OVER THE HEALTH PLAN!!!

(OOPS! sorry…)

The King of the economy won’t be king for long if he continues to nibble at the underlying causes of “Bush’s” depression. Next thing you know, he might be bringing up the CRA or, Karl forbid, the role of Community Organizers in the euphamisticly described “decline” in the housing market.

Paulson: Don’t use bailout money for automakers

By JULIE HIRSCHFELD DAVIS

WASHINGTON – Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson told Congress on Tuesday that the administration remains firmly opposed to dipping into the government’s $700 billion financial bailout fund for a $25 billion rescue package for Detroit’s Big Three automakers, no matter how badly they need the help.

“There are other ways” to help them, Paulson told the House Financial Services Committee as the bailout bill clung to life support on Capitol Hill.

Committee members grilled Paulson on the administration’s stance that the $25 billion must come from separate legislation passed in September that Congress designed specifically to help auto manufacturers retool their factories so they can make more fuel-efficient vehicles…

http://tinyurl.com/57b23f

Somebody better tell Mr. Paulson that the DNC owes the UAW big time.

The slowing of European economies has been even more drastic.

and,

Question(:) Congress gave you the authority you requested, and the economy has only become worse…(Answer:) …the purpose of the financial rescue legislation was to stabilize our financial system and to strengthen it.

Considering that the European economies are socialist by nature – that is, the industries associated with European GNP are owned or heavily subsidized by the government – does Mr. Paulson see any correlation between the greater depth of the European economic recession and the amount of European government involvement in the economies? Does Mr. Paulson foresee the same danger in involving American government in the free market – namely, that by subsidizing companies that gambled and lost in the free market, the US GNP would face deeper negative consequences (like Europe) than would be the case if the government stayed out of market in the first place?

Obviously, Mr. Paulson can craft the supposed questions any way he wants – especially when they lend themselves to the answers he already has on hand. Better questions would be beneficial: However, since the congressional majority and the President-Elect already subscribe to greater government involvement in the market, more in-depth questioning of Mr. Paulson is highly unlikely.

Sadly, like the Great Depression, the effects of greater government involvement in the markets will be to lengthen the recovery.